Jerry, loathe as I am to take issue with you again but I'm afraid the well used English phrase of 'Talking absolute bollocks' springs immediately to mind when I just read your post..
First off, you seem to be of the notion, that post-game assessment of markers, plays or should play no part in the sport of paintball.
And the reason you give?
Hold on, I'm gonna choke at this point, is because, Oh My God, turn up the scmhaltzometer, here it comes,
'it was retired by the NPPL Rules Committee for two reasons. First, to further legitimise paintball as a true sport, games must be won or lost on the playing field within the game's time frame. To assess penalties after the game, and hence, after the fact, flies in the face of that concept.'
R U kiddin me ?
Let me give you a gentle prod in the direction of the greatest sporting body in the world, 'Hello McBraun', The International Olympics Committee !!!!!!
Ever heard of them ?
That same august body who drug test athletes post events and work on the premise, that if the test proves positive i.e. that athlete was deemed to have taken an illegal substance, then that athlete should not only be banned but have whatever medals they won, taken away.
Basically, the game should be won on-field as you say but if that athlete was running around with a gun that was firing over the legal limit, then he should be punished in some way, NO ARGUMENT !!!!!!!
You seem to hold on-field actions as inviolate whereas the notion that perhaps (and in some cases more than likely) those people played ON-FIELD with illegal markers and therefore cheated their result , is deemed to be of lesser importance!!!
The whole idea of post game assessment and penalty allocation is embraced by the IOC and yet you want us to think it has no place in paintball because you want to legitimise it as a sport ?
You think that Paintball is bigger than the Olympics ????????????
<----- Just gone into ‘vomit’ mode
And your qualifier in this enlightened piece of legislature is that people could prepare for this chronographing because they knew it would come at the end of the game, and also, they would be more fearful of on-field chronographing.
Correct up to a point.
I have been to more tournaments than you and I both care to mention, I have never and I mean never seen a comprehensive and meaningful assault with regard to on-field chronographing.
The most I have ever seen chronographed in one game is two players from one team.
R U telling me that in today's climate of judge's (And by extension promoter's) inaction coupled with some players predisposition to engineer cheats on their guns, that this is the best climate to introduce no 'end of game' chronographing.
When safety is, and should be, the number one consideration in paintball, a 'belt and braces' programme of on-field and off-field chronographing is by far the best strategy.
Every player I know, has no problem with being chronographed at any time, you start to introduce areas of weakness (and it would be a weakness, make no mistake about that) and you will have every frikkin cheat exploiting it to the detriment of the safety of the rest of us who do not feel the need to turn up our guns to play ball.
Damnit Jerry, and there was me thinking you couldn't shoot a barn door with a paintball marker and you just damn shot yourself in the foot !!!!!
Good shot mate !!!
(by the way, that was irony, I know I have to explain 'irony' sometimes to you Yanks)
Laters Jez
Pete
